Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
The 2015 general election sparked a 56% spike in jobs. The 2016 Brexit referendum prompted an 18% hike in hiring. And now the 2017 general election, after months of contraction in hiring, caused a 3% increase in jobs available, month-on-month. “Each election over the course of the last three years has defied expectations and resulted in an upswing in hiring, albeit with a little less panache this time around,” said Hakan Enver, Operations Director, Morgan McKinley Financial Services.
Though the back-to-back elections failed to materialize the predicted result, voter fatigue is setting in and institutions are growing wary of operating in a stop-and-go climate. “Our clients want to recruit aggressively, but one year into a post-Brexit world, they’re still holding back. If it weren’t for the ongoing confusion surrounding the business climate, the jobs available numbers would be even higher,” said Enver.
In the June general election, the public sent a clear message that they oppose the hard Brexit that the government has been pursuing over the course of the last 12 months. “It took Brexit to show the British public just how much we benefit from the EU, and the buyer’s remorse is showing. Without a mandate for a hard Brexit, the government is finally being forced to compromise, which is in the best interest of all involved,” said Enver.
Even as the prospect of a softer Brexit grows more likely, the shift comes too late for some. Though the 5% increase in job seekers, month-on-month, demonstrates that professionals are regaining confidence in the financial services job market, the 49% decrease in job seekers, year-on-year, underscores the dramatic shift in the City’s workforce heralded by the vote to leave the EU.
The City’s business services sector employs over 190,000 workers, making it London’s largest employer of EU nationals. All in all, 43,000 EU nationals left Britain last year. Were the trend to continue, the region faces an additional loss of £6bn in tax revenue, annually. “It’s a fundamental failure of political leadership that so many talented professionals have stopped seeing their futures here in Britain,” said Enver.
The talent attrition is being felt by employers, also. Open University surveyed 400 British based firms of which 90% reported difficulty recruiting skilled staff since Brexit. The survey further found that the skills gap costs British businesses £2bn a year, a hefty price tag in an already uncertain economy. “It is now time for action to be taken to prevent a further brain drain of talent out of London. This situation will get worse, more and more candidates are relocating back to their home nations or alternatively making it clear to their employers that once an opportunity arises to relocate, they would like to be considered.”
Where the jobs are growing and where they’re going
Beyond the booming fintech sector, which is being driven by hiring in artificial intelligence and cyber security in response to escalating systems threats, hiring for regulatory jobs have picked up significant pace. “In response to the latest round of US banking stress tests, our clients are recruiting aggressively for people with expertise in risk management, quantitative finance and internal audit,” said Enver. “As technology and business units move beyond collaboration to full on integration, regulatory compliance and efficiencies are a top priority for institutions.”Since Brexit, there has been an expectation of growth in the regulatory sub-sector of financial services, but the lack of clarity surrounding the UK’s divorce proceedings from the EU have forced institutions to hold back from hiring until they know what areas of expertise are required to navigate the regulatory waters. “The second the cat’s out of the bag and we know what regulatory hurdles institutions face, hiring in regulatory departments is going to skyrocket,” said Enver
Though only 2% of the City’s jobs, the announcement that 9,000 jobs will be relocated from the UK to mainland Europe stoked concerns that the worst Brexit fallout may yet lie ahead, not least of all because of the impact the loss would have on tax revenues. The exact jobs number, however, is contingent on issues such as passporting and freedom of movement, both of which remain sticking points for the business community. “The British economy is already highly dependent on the City’s contribution to government coffers, so if all 9,000 jobs are moved away, it will impact not only the banker in London, but also the police officer in Liverpool, ” said Enver.
As with all things Brexit, there is no certainty surrounding whether or not jobs will be relocated, and even senior financial services titans disagree on the current state of the City: when HSBC chairman Douglas Flint compared London’s post-Brexit financial services sector to a Jenga tower, poised to collapse, Lloyds Banking Group chairman Lord Blackwell was quick to disagree. “At this stage it’s less like Jenga and more like a drawn out game of cricket where it’s beginning to feel like it might never end, but it will, and the City will adapt,” said Enver.
Ignore millennials at your own peril
Millennials are aging into entry and mid-level positions, making them a central focus of hiring across the financial services sector. Despite being among the most impacted by Brexit, they were largely ignored by Tory candidates. “Millennials are integral to the future of the British workforce. We’ve already alienated countless EU nationals, we can’t well afford to alienate a generation of creative and ambitious Britons, too,” said Enver.Indeed millennials are already pushing the City to change its standard operating procedures. Goldman Sachs has termed this the ‘millennial economy’ and is investing considerable resources on learning how to recruit from the enigmatic generation. “It’s not an easy predicament for the City, having to adapt to rapid shifts in technology while meeting the demands of the first generation of digital natives, and all in a post-Brexit climate. But failure to attract millennials and harness their skills will be a greater threat to the Square Mile’s existence than all the regulatory hurdles Brussels can throw at us combined,” concluded Enver.
(Source: Morgan McKinley)
Law school is the one thing lawyers all have in common. Whether a trainee solicitor in a regional high street firm, a partner in a multinational law firm, or a barrister working in-house, we all went through much the same experience. But there are some things that were likely never taught. Here Will De Fazio-Saunders, solicitor at Barlow Robbins LLP, discusses 5 of these things.
We all attended lectures and seminars, spent hours poring through textbooks and marking up statute books, and sat exams. We steeped ourselves in Coke, Blackstone and Denning and came out of law school with our minds (more or less) full to the brim with legal theory.
However, we were not lawyers yet. Law school was essential in providing us with the requisite academics to contribute to the profession but out in the ‘real world’ legal theory and legal practice are two very different things.
In law school, we were used to writing lengthy essays encompassing statute, case-law and complex legal principles but when a client comes to us with a legal problem, they do not want a 3000-word treatise full of statutory citations and obiter dicta quotations. They probably did not go to law school, and, even if they did, that is not why they are contacting us. Clients want us to explain how we can solve their problem or help them achieve their goal, and explain in a way which is easily digestible - a skill which takes years to learn.
Depending upon our practice, we may come across clients from a range of different backgrounds. Some have no understanding of the law whatsoever and we need to spell out everything. Others are more sophisticated users of legal services, and we want to avoid patronising them, whilst still ensuring that we give full and clear advice. Tailoring advice to each client is a skill which can only be learned over time.
Whilst many lawyers may work in-house, and are lucky enough not to need to deal with costs, for the rest of us, costs are a potential minefield – particularly for the freshly minted lawyer.
How to estimate costs effectively to cover the work we are going to do without putting off potential clients by pricing ourselves out of the market; how to approach revising our estimates if we are going to go over budget; and when to take a global, commercial view before billing a client every penny of WIP – dealing with costs is undoubtedly more an art than a science.
Complaints are, sadly, an inevitable part of the job for most, if not all, lawyers. Even some of the very best and most experienced lawyers must deal with complaints – whether unfounded or otherwise – from time to time.
Typical complaints that arise relate to costs (another reason to ensure that as lawyers we become adept at handling that potentially sensitive issue). Many clients are bound to complain about the final bill when it arrives, no matter how happy they have been with the service and how clear we were from the outset about the costs.
On other occasions, we may need to hold up our hands and admit that perhaps we did not revise our estimate quite as often as we should have done. A lawyer’s first complaint is never a pleasant experience, and it is only over time that one learns how to deal with (and – preferably – avoid) them.
Gone are the days when a firm of solicitor could simply open shop on the high street and expect enough footfall to keep the filing cabinets full of new matters. The legal industry has never been more competitive, and, accordingly, lawyers have never been required to engage in as much marketing as they do today.
Articles and blogs, seminars, networking events – these are all part and parcel of most 21st century lawyers’ professional life, but something law school neglected to cover in lectures and seminars.
Endeavouring to teach law students exactly how to work within “a law firm” would be an exercise in futility, since no two law firms are the same. Like any business, it is only after spending some time at a firm that we learn how the operation functions – how solicitors, partners, paralegals, and support staff work together; the firm’s (and individual lawyers’) approach to writing, drafting, billing, and everything else which goes with the job.
Equally, it is only after working at a law firm – and possibly more than one – that we can be sure we have found the right fit for the lawyers we are, and the lawyers we want to be.
Below Sailesh Mehta, a Barrister and Head of the Fire Law Group at Red Lion Chambers, discusses the Grenfell tower amnesty, the disputes surrounding and what could be one of the biggest inquiries of our time.
In the early hours of 14th June 2017, one of the UK’s deadliest fires swept through Grenfell Tower. The 24-storey block housed about 350 people in about 130 flats. The fire raged for many hours and reached temperatures that were high enough to melt everything on many floors, the temperature reaching 100 degrees Celsius. The current death toll is 80 and is likely to rise.
A small number of residents were immigrants without a right to remain in the UK. Some had unlawfully sub-let their flats to others. Because these residents were fearful that they or their families would get into trouble with the police, immigration authorities or with the local authority, they were not forthcoming in assisting the police and fire brigade to build up a picture of the casualties.
It should have been a relatively easy task to draw up a list of all residents to ascertain numbers in the Block. The above factors made the task almost impossible. As a result, the local authority and Government acted relatively swiftly to offer amnesties: an amnesty from prosecution sub-letters; a limited amnesty for survivors who contact the Home Office will be given up to a year’s temporary leave to remain in Britain.
The Government has justified both amnesties on the grounds of public policy – that the public policy imperative in getting to the true number of casualties (and in ensuring they receive the help they need) is greater than the public policy consideration of punishing those who break the law. The DPP has confirmed she will not prosecute anyone who comes forward and admits offences in these circumstances. While there are purists who have criticised this approach, the majority of commentators have supported the initiative. In fact, the Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott MP believes the 12-month immigration amnesty do not go far enough. For the amnesty to be “truly effective,” she believes it should have no time limit.
Amnesties such as those for Grenfell survivors are not unusual in the UK and have been utilised to great effect in other parts of the world. In South Africa, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission ensured that in appropriate cases, amnesty (subject to conditions) was granted even for the most horrendous crimes, to ensure the greater cause of restorative justice. El Salvador, Guatamala and Haiti are also beneficiaries of UN brokered deals which have used amnesty as a tool for towards a peaceful solution to conflict. Such amnesties have not been without problem, and are often criticised by human rights groups, who fear an erosion of the rule of law.
In Northern Ireland, amnesties on both sides of the divide were regularly used as implements to get to the truth (for example, The ‘Bloody Sunday’ Inquiry) as well as tools to overcome roadblocks on the path to The Good Friday Agreement.
The European Court of Human Rights has not had much opportunity to adjudicate directly on amnesties. In Tarbuk v Croatia, the Court held that the State is justified in enacting, in the context of its criminal policy, any amnesty laws it might consider necessary, with the proviso, however, that a balance is maintained between the legitimate interests of the State and the interests of individual members of the public. This restates the finding of the European Commission’s admissibility decision in Dujardin and Others v Franc.
The Grenfell Inquiry is in the early stages of being set up. It is likely to be one of the most important inquiries of recent times. It is already in difficulty with the local community, whose representatives have complained of a lack of trust in the Inquiry team and the process generally. If the Inquiry is to get at the best approximation to truth, it will need to ensure the residents and their families cooperate with it. The Inquiry will need to re-visit amnesties as a broad range of individuals and companies are likely to seek immunity from prosecution. The Inquiry will be slow to extend any immunity beyond the survivors.
So maybe working for a law firm isn’t down your street, you want to work for a prestigious tech firm, or defend refugees as a public servant. Just know that there are many other options to practice law. Here, Flora Duguid, MVF’s in-house legal counsel, talks Lawyer Monthly through the endless variety of jobs a 21st century lawyer can home in on.
Are you cut out for a non-traditional law career?
The legal profession is ripe for disruption and new career paths for law grads in the tech sector are being forged all the time. For the past three years, the tech sector has offered the highest number of entry-level jobs. New concepts like driverless cars and the Internet of Things means that the tech sector is developing faster than the law can keep up. This spells opportunities for the smart and ambitious who are willing to take the jump.
So, you’ve graduated - what now?
Graduating from university is daunting for many people, but law is a respected discipline and offers a whole array of opportunities. Now, more than ever, these opportunities lie outside of the traditional law firm. After graduating from the University of Leeds with a law degree, I wanted to learn more about the corporate world, particularly companies in the startup space who were building their ventures from scratch and gaining notoriety for doing business differently.
My first job was at a travel and events start-up and as one of the first employees I was given a lot of responsibility very early on; travelling between the Caribbean and the Med, negotiating contracts and on-boarding new suppliers. Based out of the founder’s living room, we had that wonderful feeling of possibility that comes in the early days of a startup because we knew we were the ones that could get the business off the ground. Of course, the late nights were inevitable but certainly made better with the help of pizza and beer!
After training and qualifying as a solicitor at RPC I knew that my passion was in commercial law, with a focus on digital media and emerging technology. Working with tech-clients meant that the work was always fast-paced, extremely commercial and challenging because we were providing advice on disruptive legal innovations.
I was seconded to Google’s legal team where I worked on some really exciting issues - the team were acting on unanswered questions, like how to regulate the YouTube platform in line with the emergence of online vlogger influencers. Laws created in the 20th century don’t always solve 21st century tech issues. The lawyers I worked with were incredibly creative, tackling challenges that have arisen in the information age - the team was creating new precedents.
Working at the UK’s fastest growing tech company
It’s not enough just to understand the law - lawyers need to grasp how the business works from a commercial and technological point of view, especially when working with founders who are in the process of scaling their business. In my current position, as legal counsel at MVF, I have been able to combine my passion for tech, law and entrepreneurship, working across a range of commercial issues to help set the business up for success and facilitate growth through M&A and staying abreast of emerging trends in the digital space.
As a fast-growing digital marketing technology company, data protection is a key focus for our team, covering everything from data security to the types of data collected. It’s establishing what the law requires you to do to protect that information, but also advising from a commercial perspective so the company can monetise it. Building trusting relationships with key stakeholders across the business has been essential in helping me understand our main drivers for success and strategise accordingly.
Ask questions to interesting people
There are lots of exceptionally successful and inspirational people working in the legal industry and the most valuable thing I did in the very early years of my career was never shying away from asking lots of questions. At RPC, I was mentored by Olly Bray, a highly experienced commercial contracts partner who has a wealth of knowledge about digital media; from emerging technologies to innovations in advertising and marketing, right through to data protection law.
There is a common misconception that practicing law requires no creativity but this myth was busted soon after I joined Google. I was surrounded by some of the most innovative and imaginative people in the business who are working at the crossroads of law and new technology, helping Google build innovative and important products for users around the world, but most importantly they were always willing to share their insight.
Since working at MVF, Tom Worner, our General Counsel has been a real source of inspiration, teaching me the importance of developing a sound business acumen in a fast-paced, entrepreneurial environment.
It might sound cliche but never forget the power of building a network - find opportunities to meet with legal professionals who work in-house to learn more about the variety of work available and the challenges they have faced working outside of a traditional firm.
Sam Harper, GC at Deliveroo has had a really interesting career and has been a soundboard to bounce ideas off. Josh Horowitz, former GC at Tilt is interesting to follow - holding a mix of legal and commercial roles at tech giants.
Build your community
My advice is to absorb yourself with your passions - for me that’s tech, start-ups and entrepreneurialism in the legal sphere. Serial entrepreneur Jimmy Vestbirk has launched Legal Geek which organises events and meet-ups for lawtech start-ups and hackathons where some of the most groundbreaking ideas are born.
Keep close to the developments in the legal-tech world - there is always a new company disrupting the sector and challenging the status-quo of the traditional law firm. Echosign - the e-signature content management software was the creation of a Berkeley law school grad which has grown into a $50 million APR business. Rocket Lawyer, the Google Ventures backed legal document service was founded in 2008 and generates over $30 million in annual revenue.
As well as building a network, it’s important to seek out opportunities to practice outside of your day job.
I’m a member of the Summit Series - a network which creates unique gatherings designed to catalyse entrepreneurship, creative achievement and global change. I mentor at start-up accelerators providing legal and commercial advice to fast-growing, dynamic companies. I also adjudicate for Virgin Business pitchathons and hold office hours at co-working spaces.
Final word
As business, tech and the law collide, the tech sector needs people with a legal background who can interpret the law for new products. Lawyers have been trained to be methodical, analytical and have strong attention to detail – all invaluable skills. It’s an exciting place to be - entrepreneurial lawyers will be creating and shaping the legal landscape for tomorrow’s digital sphere.
A knife-wielding man shouting "Allahu Akbar" has attacked police on the Spanish-Moroccan border, injuring an officer, according to Spanish authorities. The attacker was immediately arrested by Spanish law enforcement.
In this video, McNees attorney James J. Franklin discusses the driverless car phenomenon and the legal ramifications that could develop as more semi and fully autonomous vehicles hit the roads.
While politicians go back and forth from one administration to the next, US citizens continue to be caught in the middle of a legislative gunfight. This Bloomberg QuickTake video explains the current battle over gun rights.
Everyone tends to have a Twitter or a Facebook, and some go as far as a YouTube channel and a LinkedIn, but where is the power in these tools if not in the creative and outward approach a firm puts into them? Below, Cleland Thom Principal at the College of Media and Publishing, explains.
Some legal firms are nervous about using social media, and rightly so. It can be a harsh medium. You cannot control it, and mistakes can be cruelly punished. And lawyers also run the risk of inadvertently breaching professional obligations.
But social media can bring significant benefits if it is used thoughtfully. The main attraction is that it’s free.
Many businesses just use social media for the sake of it. They have a Twitter feed and a Facebook page because everyone else does, and then waste time filling them with content no-one reads and that does not serve any purpose.
So, if you are considering using social media, you need to establish:
Your answers to these questions will help you focus your activities.
The main social media channels are: Facebook, Google+, Twitter, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Instagram and Flickr (images), YouTube and Vimeo.
You need to decide:
Social media has six main purposes for lawyers:
It’s best to use each channel for different purpose. Some businesses post the same content everywhere, but this is pointless. You should use channels for specific jobs, and never use a channel for the sake of it. For instance, your business might use:
This activity needs planning and takes time, and if you can’t use it well, it’s best not to use it at all - poor online presence can damage a firm’s overall reputation. So, either post regular, high quality content … or don’t bother.
Some business subcontract their social media to an agency, and this makes sense if they do not have the time or expertise to do it themselves.
Others identify a younger member of staff, and send them on a social media marketing course to give them the necessary skills.
If you run your own social media activities, only use the channels you can cope with. Introduce them one at a time – don’t use them one unless you need it, and can cope with it.
Coping doesn’t just mean updating the posts, but also responding quickly to messages and comments from users. Legal firms usually take their time to answer letters and emails, and may have to learn the meaning of the word ‘quickly’ if they want to do well in the social media world!
There are a number of risks associated with social media. Most readers will be aware of the legal dangers associated with copyright, defamation, privacy, data protection and other laws. If not, they should consider buying my book, Online Law!
However, it’s easy to make mistakes through ignorance. Here are some of the main points to remember:
The Law Society has other useful tips and guidelines here.
Buyers of new build leasehold properties need to ensure they are not letting themselves in for a huge financial burden which may make it difficult to sell their house on in the future, warns property specialist Liz Brady, a Partner at South East law firm Furley Page.
It is a long-established practice for homes to have long leaseholds – about 20% of private homes in England have them – but over the past 10 years house building developers have created more leasehold housing estates.
Liz explains that rather than levy the “peppercorn” ground rents common for centuries on long leases, some developers are increasing them considerably over the period of the lease.
More worrying is that if a leasehold owner of a house wishes, for example, to acquire the freehold interest in their house some years later to make it more attractive for sale, the landlord may charge a prohibitively high price for such freehold purchase because the price will reflect the loss to the landlord of the future ground rent income.
Liz says: “We are seeing ground rents in long leases which double, say, every five years. The reason for this trend for developers to have high or increasing ground rents has nothing to do with the law but is driven by the developer’s desire to create another source of income and thereby create an investment asset for the landlord/developer.”
She says purchasers need to fully understand the arrangements they are entering into and should seek professional advice. However, the good news is that other parts of the property sector are now seeking to rein in the worst cases of uncapped ground rents.
“The outcry over uncapped ground rents has caused one large developer to apologise to its leaseholders and acknowledge that it will try to rectify the situation.
“Some lenders have added their voices expressing concern. Nationwide has taken steps to protect its mortgage members from escalating ground rents with a new valuation policy for new build leasehold properties. It is the first major lender to impose fairer lending conditions on these homes. The maximum acceptable starting ground rent on all new build leasehold properties will be limited to 0.1% of the property’s value.
“If the valuer believes that the marketability of the property would be severely affected by unreasonable lease terms, Nationwide may decline to lend on the property, or reflect those terms in the valuation figure they provide to the lender.”
She said that other banks and building societies will no doubt follow suit, and adds: “It is advisable for potential purchasers of new build leasehold properties to be fully aware of this issue before they proceed.”
(Source: Furley Page Solicitors)
According to reports, apprenticeship hires skyrocketed in months leading up to the Apprenticeship Levy reforms, increasing by 47% between February and April this year.
As a consequence of the reforms, and therefore employers handing over to cash to the levy pot, there will also in future be more funding available for apprenticeship programmes across the country. Since April, all employers in England with a pay bill of over £3 million are required to pay 0.5% into the Apprenticeship Levy.
According to specialist recruiter, Clayton Legal, the Apprenticeship Levy has the potential to increase social mobility within the legal profession. This comes at a time when organisations such as the Chartered Institute of Management are calling on employers to offer higher-level apprenticeships as a route to promoting diversity in their workforces.
In return, firms receive financial support or grants for taking on apprentices. For smaller firms who employ less than 50 people, 100% funding is available for young people’s training programmes.
Regarding apprenticeships in the legal sector, Lynn Sedgwick, Managing Director, at Clayton Legal, had this to say:
“Apprenticeships in the legal sector are nothing new; aged 15, Charles Dickens studied the law as an attorney’s apprentice. However, with the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy, the door is now open for a swathe of new entrants to the legal profession and with it increased social mobility. And while this shift in attitude within the profession clearly isn’t going to happen overnight, encouragingly we’ve already seen an increased appetite from law firms such as Addleshaw Goddard to set up their own apprenticeship schemes.
“As far as routes into the legal sector are concerned, traditionally it has come via a university degree with individuals applying for a training contract with a firm once they graduate. However, the Levy is opening the way for new recruits to work in a law firm and develop the skills, knowledge and experience that will build them a career in the profession, with many choosing the paralegal apprenticeship route as the way in. The Levy looks set to ensure that people who may have been excluded from entering the profession in the past – because they couldn’t attend university, for example, - are able to do so.
“By breaking down barriers to entry and offering candidates a different route into law, many will have the chance to develop a rigorous, demanding, absorbing and well-paid career, whatever their background – which can only be good for the profession as a whole.”
